“You know
very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their
government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and
you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us
even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control
congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything
in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can’t criticize Israel…”
Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache

Finally, proof that the United States has
lied in the drone wars.

It turns out that the Obama administration has not been honest about who the
CIA has been targeting with drones in Pakistan. Jonathan
Landay, national security reporter at McClatchy Newspapers, has provided the first analysis of drone-strike victims that is
based upon internal, top-secret U.S. intelligence reports. It is the most important
reporting on U.S. drone strikes to date because Landay, using U.S. government
assessments, plainly demonstrates that the claim repeatedly made by President
Obama and his senior aides -- that targeted killings are limited only to
officials, members, and affiliates of al Qaeda who pose an imminent threat of
attack on the U.S. homeland -- is false.
Senior officials and agencies have emphasized this point over and over
because it is essential to the legal foundations on which the strikes are
ultimately based: the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force and the U.N.
Charter's right to self-defense. A Department
of Justice white paper said that the United States can target a
"senior operational leader of al-Qa'ida or an associated force" who
"poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United
States." Attorney General Eric Holder said the administration targets "specific
senior operational leaders of al-Qaeda and associated forces," and Harold Koh, the senior State Department legal adviser
dubbed them "high-level al-Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks."
Obama said during a Google+ Hangout in January 2012: "These strikes have
been in the FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas] and going after al-Qaeda
suspects." Finally, Obama claimed in September: "Our goal has been to focus on
al Qaeda and to focus narrowly on those who would pose an imminent threat to
the United States of America."
As the Obama administration unveils its promised and overdue targeted-killing reforms over the next
few months, citizens, policymakers, and the media should keep in mind this
disconnect between who the United States claimed it was killing and who it was
actually killing.
Landay's reporting primarily covers the most intensive period of CIA drone
strikes, from September 2010 to September 2011. "[T]he documents reveal
estimates of deaths and injuries; locations of militant bases and compounds;
the identities of some of those targeted or killed; the movements of targets
from village to village or compound to compound; and, to a limited degree, the
rationale for unleashing missiles," he writes.
While he provides few direct quotes from the documents, his most important
finding is this:
At least 265 of up to 482 people who the U.S. intelligence reports estimated
the CIA killed during a 12-month period ending in September 2011 were not
senior al Qaida leaders but instead were "assessed" as Afghan,
Pakistani and unknown extremists. Drones killed only six top al Qaida leaders
in those months, according to news media accounts.
Forty-three of 95 drone strikes reviewed for that period hit groups other
than al Qaida, including the Haqqani network, several Pakistani Taliban
factions and the unidentified individuals described only as "foreign
fighters" and "other militants."...
At other times, the CIA killed people who only were suspected, associated
with, or who probably belonged to militant groups.
This scope of targeting complicates the Obama administration's claim that
only those al Qaeda members who are an imminent threat to the U.S. homeland can
be killed. In reality, starting in the summer of 2008, when President Bush
first authorized signature strikes in Pakistan, the vast majority of
drone-strike victims were from groups focused on establishing some form of
Sharia law, attacking Pakistani security forces, and destabilizing Afghanistan
by supporting the Taliban and attacking U.S. servicemembers. The United States
essentially replicated the Vietnam War strategy of bombing the Vietcong's safe
haven in Cambodia. In addition, the CIA was engaging in "side payment
strikes" against the Pakistani Taliban to eliminate threats on Islamabad's
behalf. This was not a secret to anyone following the CIA's drone program. As I
wrote as early as March 2009:
The covert program that began as an effort to kill high-value al-Qaeda and
Taliban officials responsible for previous international terror attacks (and
who continue to provide strategic guidance to the global jihadist movement) has
since led to the CIA's serving, in effect, as a counterinsurgency arm of the
Pakistani air force.

President
Obama warned Thursday that the United States will take "all necessary
steps" to protect the American people as he urged North Korea to end its
belligerence -- amid fresh concerns that the regime is preparing for a missile
launch.

"Pleeeeze attack us, Kim; we reallyreally need a war with
China to save the dollar!" -- Official White Horse Souse

So it
seems, in answer to the paranoia question at the beginning of this piece: the
U.S. appears to have a comfortable lead in maintaining delusions of being
threatened.

While the
threats to North Korea are real and existential, that doesn’t preclude some paranoia
at the same time: consider the suggestion [13]that[13] the 2010 torpedo-sinking
of a South Korean ship – blamed on North Korea and raising war fears – was
actually a false flag operation by the Israeli navy using a state-of-the-art
German submarine [Israel [12]has[12] a small fleet, armed with nuclear-warhead
missiles].

On
January 29, 2002, in his first State of the Union address, President George
Bush declared that North Korea was part of “an axis of evil” along with Iraq
and Iran – nations that, while not an axis in the usual sense, got grouped by
President Bush’s belief that they were all developing weapons of mass
destruction with which “to threaten the peace of the world.”

Any military conflict against North Korea is simply a prelude for a US
war against China. And why?!? Because China, and other countries, are dumping
the US dollar in favor of trade with other currencies, particularly the Chinese
gold-backed yuan.

I would, however, respectfully like to point out to the adults in the
room in the bowels of power in DC that the US government doesn't have the troop
strength, the money, or the manufacturing to insure a successful outcome of a conventional
war against China.

So far
the conflict between the USG and North Korean is a virtual false-flag only. A
major Psyops designed to deflect attention away from a seriously failing US
Administration which is pulling out all the stops to pass gun-control laws
which are designed to eventually lead to complete confiscation.

This
current conflict with North Korea has been engineered and portrayed as a real
state of conflict when it is virtual only. In practical terms, North Korea and
America are now only involved in a state of virtual war which is unlikely to be
followed with an actual real shooting war.

Virtual
war is an imaginary war fought only in the major mass media and the enemy is
the news consumer or the public which is psychologically managed. Virtual war
is a newer type of warfare which is a major Psychological operation, (aka a
Psyop), that is, an act of Mindwar against the people.

4 BIG NATIONS that have
signed a currency deal with China IN LESS THEN 2 MONTHS!!- UK- Brazil- Australia- France
American power was necessary during the Cold War. Now that capital moves
freely around the globe, capitalists do not require a specific national entity
for any particular role. In other words, the American working class will have
to pay their way in future. There are no more freebies.

April 8, 2013Trade between Australia and China just got a little easier.
The Australian dollar is set to become only the third currency to trade
directly with the Chinese yuan — a move that will help internationalize
China’s currency and
smooth transactions between the major trading partners.
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced the deal Monday during a
trip to Shanghai.
“Australia’s banks, superannuation funds and financial houses will be even
better placed to help in the growth of China’s service economy,” Gillard said.
“This is good news for the Chinese economy and good news for the Australian
economy.”

26 March 2013
China and Brazil have signed a currency swap deal, designed to safeguard
against future global financial crises.
The pact, first announced last year, will allow their central banks to swap
local currencies worth up to 190bn yuan or 60bn reais ($30bn; £20bn).
Officials said this will ensure smooth bilateral trade, regardless of global
financial conditions.
Along with being the world’s second-largest economy, China is also Brazil’s
biggest trading partner.

Sherry questioning all found this last month!
Senior U.S. administration officials held secret talks in North Korea on at
least three occasions in 2011 and 2012, The Asahi Shimbun has learned.
Although the visits had potential implications for Japan, Washington did not
inform its security partner at the time and only informally confirmed one of
them when the Japanese side pressed, government and other sources in Japan,
South Korea and the United States said.
The U.S. State Department even warned the Foreign Ministry against making
further inquiries, saying they would harm bilateral relations, the sources
said.
U.S. military planes flew from an air base in Guam to Pyongyang and back on
April 7, 2012, and again on a longer visit lasting from Aug. 18-20, the sources
said.

Ask yourselves why North Koreas suddenly issuing all these threats for war?
Why now?
The real reason is hidden and could be to do with a stategic plan called ‘America’s
Pacific Century’ , by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2011/10/175215.htm“The future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or
Iraq, and the United States will be right at the center of the action.”
They (the U.S government) are using the latest North Korea threats as a
hidden agenda to move it’s military troops into the far east and the
surrounding areas.
It is also one other reason why western countries are moving all military
troops out of countries in the middle east, Afghanistan etc.. They want to take
control of far east asia.
The latest goings on in North Korea is a hidden ploy, an agenda, of what
they are planning on doing which is taking control of centre politics in far
east Asia.DO NOT BE FOOLED
In a November 2011 article for Foreign Policy, the term was recast as
America’s Pacific Century by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to
succinctly describe the leading US foreign-policy goal of the 21st centuryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Century
“The Pacific Century (and the associated term Asia-Pacific Century) is a
term that has been used to describe the 21st century through analogy with the
term American Century. The implicit assumption underlying the usage of
the term is that the 21st century will be dominated, especially economically,
by the states in the Asia-Pacific region, in particular China, Japan,
India, South Korea, Taiwan, the ASEAN members (particularly Indonesia, Vietnam,
Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore), Australia, Russia, Canada,
Mexico, and the United States..”
“Clinton’s remarks were translated into official policy at the start of
2012, as the Obama administration outlined a new China-centric military
strategy.[5]The preceding year, Clinton had already “grabbed Beijing’s
lapels” by declaring the South China Sea as a vital American interest.[6] The
policy shift was denounced by Chinese state media, which declared that the
Americans should not “recklessly practice militarism”, nor engage in “war
mongering…”
What better way for the government to create and use the North Korea threats
as an excuse to move it’s troops and position their military might towards far
east Asia in order to gain control.
It’s all part of the plan.
There is more about this North Korea business than we know.“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet
it was planned that way.”
- Franklin D. Roosevelt
I will make this clear once more….It’s all part of their global plan.

“President
Obama introduced a new defense strategy on Thursday, aimed at creating
a leaner, more dynamic American fighting force with an enlarged presence in
Asia and the Pacific. ”

“Although
the administration is seeking to trim hundreds of billions of dollars from the
Pentagon budget, the president and Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta have said
the United States will shift resources to the region because of its growing
economic and military significance.

The
United States had signalled its intention to bolster its military presence in
Asia last month, and analysts say that has heightened concerns here that Washington is
trying to counter China’s rise.”

“However,
while boosting its military presence in the Asia-Pacific, the United States
should abstain from flexing its muscles, as this won’t help solve regional
disputes.”

A Chinese
military official has blamed the US government for the new strain of bird flu
affecting China, calling it a secret biological attack.

People's
Liberation Army Senior Colonel Dai Xu said America released the H7N0 bird flu
virus into China, in an act of biological warfare, in a blog on Saturday.

Writing
on Sina Weibo, a Chinese microblogging site similar to Twitter, Dai alleged the
new bird flu strain had been designed as a weapon, similar to severe acute
respiratory syndrome (SARS), that affected the country in 2003 and which he
claims was also developed as a US bio-weapon.

Soldiers
from the 3rd Battalion, 321st Field Artillery Regiment, XVIII Fires Brigade
train last December to “respond to an escalating civil-disturbance situation
caused by unhappy simulated hurricane victims.” According to an article
produced by the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, the training was designed to
prepare the soldiers “for their upcoming assignment as a quick reaction and
rapid response force for U.S. Army North Command in support of emergencies in
the United States.”

Translation: posse comitatus
is dead, and this government is preparing for a very nasty war against its own
citizens, soon to be brought about through the same economic collapse
this government is creating through its financial policies.

Please do not give this government what it is expecting! Don't panic, folks: please
plan accordingly.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/11/cyprus-bailout-leaked-debt-analysis-bill
Cypriot politicians have reacted with fury to news that the crisis-hit
country will be forced to find an extra €6bn (£5bn) to contribute to its own
bailout, much of which is expected to come from savers at its struggling banks.A leaked draft of the updated rescue plan, which emerged late on
Wednesday night, revealed that the total bill for the bailout has risen to €23bn,
from an original estimate of €17bn, less than a month after the deal was
agreed – and the entire extra cost will be imposed on Nicosia.
Visiting Athens, the Cypriot parliament's president, Yannakis Omirou, said
the tiny island nation had been "served poison" by its EU partners.Cyprus's politicians had already
faced intense domestic political pressure for agreeing to impose hefty losses
on savers at two struggling banks to fulfil its eurozone partners' original
demand that they contribute €7bn.But after a more
detailed "debt sustainability analysis" showed that the black hole in
the island nation's finances is far deeper than first thought, the total cost
for Cypriot taxpayers and depositors has now been set at €13bn, with €10bn to
come from its eurozone partners and the International Monetary Fund. The €23bn
overall bill is larger than an entire year's output from the Cypriot economy.
Jonathan Loynes, of thinktank Capital Economics, said the rising cost echoed
the pattern in other bailed-out states. "They don't know where there might
be more black holes: I wouldn't be that surprised if there were to be another
shock in the next week or so," he said.The
new draft bailout plan, which will be discussed at a meeting of finance
ministers in Dublin on Friday, underlined the botched nature of the initial
agreement, which was hurriedly cobbled together in March and had to be redrawn
after the Cypriot parliament rejected the idea that depositors holding less
than €100,000 – whose savings are meant to be insured – would face deep losses.
A new decree that will remain in place for seven days lifts all restrictions
on transactions under €300,000 to re-energise cash-starved domestic businesses
that had difficulty paying suppliers and employees. Moreover, the daily limit
on transactions outside of Cyprus not requiring prior approval is raised from
€5,000 to €20,000.However, a daily cash
withdrawal limit of €300 remains in place, as well as a ban on cashing cheques.
The decree also introduced a new restriction on opening new accounts in banks
where customers had never done business before.Much of the extra €6bn
is expected to come from savers – though Cyprus is also expected to be forced
to sell €400m of gold reserves, renegotiate the terms of a loan with Russia,
and impose losses on Bank of Cyprus creditors. There was also a
suggestion that holders of €1bn worth of Cypriot government bonds could be
urged to agree to a debt swap, reducing the country's repayments. That could
signal a messy period of negotiation and uncertainty.

On
Sunday, Prime Minister Pedro Passos Coelho reaffirmed Lisbon's commitments to
its fiscal tightening goals under an EU/IMF bailout, promising to compensate
for the court decision with other spending cuts.

...

Mr
Coelho's pledge to meet targets with more spending cuts means Lisbon will now
have to find another 0.8 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to satisfy the
'troika' of lenders - the EU, European Central Bank and International Monetary
Fund - which demand austerity in return for bailout loans.

Lisbon
has already promised its lenders to cut 4 billion euros progressively in
spending between 2013 and 2015 - and the pace of the cuts will now have to
accelerate.

...

The
government now plans to cut spending in areas like the healthcare system,
pensions and education.

With
unemployment at unprecedented levels in the EU, the risk of social unrest is
rising, says the UN’s International Labour Organization. The ILO is warning
politicians to abandon austerity and embrace job creation.

“When
unemployment is as high as it is right now – as poverty and welfare protection
become worse – then the danger of social unrest grows along with it,” says
Miguel Angel Malo.

Malo is a
professor of economics in Salamanca, Spain – a country where youth unemployment
is at 56 percent. Additionally he’s an economics expert at the International
Labour Organization (ILO), a UN agency seeking to promote labor rights.

It was
for the ILO that Malo co-authored a paper with an unsettling thesis: the
likelihood of social unrest is increasing. Or at least, it’s becoming far more
likely in certain areas of Europe.

What is happening in Europe...will not stay in Europe.

When the money runs out for the US government (and this is a question of
when, not if), we can expect to see unrest in this country as well. The Federal
government is already planning for it; if not, why the purchase of
millions of bullets by the Department of Homeland Security, which is supposed
to have no real purpose outside of the United States domestic borders?!?

I was
able to reconnect for an interview with legendary Quantum Fund manager and commodities
bull, Jim Rogers. This was an especially groundbreaking interview, as Jim
shared thoughts on what governments around the world will be taking next, and
what he’s doing right now to protect his personal bank accounts following the
Cyprus collapse.

Speaking
towards the frightening implications of the Cyprus banking collapse, Jim said
that, “It’s been condoned [now] by the IMF, the European union, and everybody
else in sight; that a government in need, can take assets. We all knew they
could tax us…but this is the first time that I’m aware of, that they’ve gone in
and taken bank accounts. They took gold from people in the U.S. in the
1930?s…but I’ve never heard of them taking bank accounts. [Now] they’re doing
it. So be careful [because], now they can take your bank account under this
precedent.“

The
recent bail-in in Cyprus has given the world a glimpse at the future of the
banking landscape. Now, as Canada gets set to hardwire the bail-in process into
law, analysts like Michel Chossudovsky are warning how the big banks can use
this template to further consolidate their monopoly of economic control. This
is the GRTV Backgrounder on Global Research TV.

During the midst of the Cyprus scandal, the
government of Canada released its own proposed budget for the coming year, including language that
suggests a bail-in regime:

“The Government proposes to implement a “bail-in” regime for systemically
important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely
event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be
recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of
certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital. This will reduce risks for
taxpayers. The Government will consult stakeholders on how best to implement a
bail-in regime in Canada.”
In response to public furore over the proposal, Canada’s Finance Minister was
forced to come out last week todeny that
the nebulously defined “certain bank liabilities” includes consumer deposits,
but refused to clarify precisely what liabilities would be covered by such
language.

As Michel Chossudovsky—professor of economics at the University of
Ottawa—explains, the real danger of the Cyprus example is not that this will be
a common way of dealing with future bank stresses, but precisely the opposite.
With the bail-in procedure in their arsenal, bankers and their political
cronies will be able to use this weapon of financial destruction not against
the “too big to jails” of the big six megabanks in America or their
counterparts around the world, but against smaller credit unions and
independent banks that threaten their monopoly of power.

The Financial
Stability Board which has been working on
institutionalizing the bail-in process is an international body coordinating
the work of national and international standard setting bodies for the
financial sector. It sprang from the earlier Financial Stability Forum, itself
a creation of the G7 in 1999, and includes bodies like the Bank for
International Settlements among its member institutions.
The FSB is currently chaired by Mark Carney, the current Governor of the Bank
of Canada who is set to take the reins of the Bank of England in July of this
year in a highly unusual move. Before beginning work for the Canadian
Department of Finance, Carney spent 13 years at Goldman Sachs, where he was
involved in a 1998 Russian
financial scandal, with Goldman advising the Russian
government at the same time as it was betting against the country’s ability to
repay its debt.

As critics like Matt Taibbi and others have exhaustively documented, Goldman
Sachs has been at the heart of
every major market manipulation in the US since the Great Depression, and has
been the key cheerleader for
the austerity measures that are currently tearing the Eurozone apart and
creating the banking crises in Cyprus and other European countries.

Concluding remarks
What is occurring is that the bank bailouts are no longer functional. At the
outset of Obama’s Second term, the coffers of the state are empty. The
austerity measures have reached a deadlock.
The bank bail-ins are now being contemplated instead of the “bank
bailouts”.
The lower and middle income groups which are invariably indebted will not be
the main target. The appropriation of bank deposits would essentially target
the upper middle and upper income groups which have significant bank deposits.
The second target will be the bank accounts of small and medium sized firms.
This transition is part of the evolution of the global economic crisis and
the impasse underlying the application of the austerity measures.
The purpose of the global financial actors is to wipe out competitors,
consolidate and centralize bank power and exert an overriding control over the
real economy, the institutions of government and the military.
Even if the bail-ins were to be regulated and applied selectively to a
limited number of failing financial institutions, credit unions, etc, the
announcement of a program of confiscation of deposits could potentially lead to
a generalized “run on the banks”. In this context, no banking institution would
be regarded as safe.
The application of Bail-in procedures involving deposit confiscation (even
when applied locally or selectively) would create financial havoc. It would
interrupt the payments process. Wages would no longer be paid. Purchasing power
would collapse. Money for investment in plant and equipment would no longer be
forthcoming. Small and medium sized businesses would be precipitated into
bankruptcy.
The application of a Bail-In in the EU or North America would initiate a new
phase of the global financial crisis, a deepening of the economic depression, a
greater centralization of banking and finance, increased concentration of
corporate power in the real economy to the detriment of regional and local
level enterprises.
In turn, an entire global banking network characterized by electronic
transactions (which govern deposits, withdrawals, etc), –not to mention money
transactions on the stock and commodity markets– could potentially be the
object of significant disruptions of a systemic nature.
The social consequences would be devastating. The real economy would plummet
as a result of the collapse in the payments system.
The potential disruptions in the functioning of an integrated global
monetary system could result in a a renewed global economic meltdown as well as
a drop off in international commodity trade.
It is important that people across the land, in the European Union and North
America, nationally and internationally, forcefully act against the diabolical
ploys of their governments –acting on behalf of dominant financial interests–
to implement a selective process of bank deposit confiscation.

My Disclaimer:

I present this information in my capacity as a human being, under Common Law, exercising my fundamental God given rights and freedoms. This information represents my private thoughts and beliefs and has been compiled and expressed for educational purposes only. In no way should it be construed as either legal or financial advice. If anyone feels a need to determine the accuracy of this information and the effectiveness of apply any of it, I strongly recommend consulting a competent expert on this subject matter.

Here's a Clue:Look the one place "They" never talk about.Look to your heart, as your competent expert lies within."Seek and you shall find."